Replies

She did early this morning, but then had a long interview and calls about some pics of fallen Marines.

Radio news reporting on Republicans! Playing some speeches slamming Nancy, and then reporting that the Pres CANNOT call Congress back in session because the Senate has not formally recessed? (which Reid did to prevent Pres from recess appointments)

Did I hear that right?

She did early this morning, but then had a long interview and calls about some pics of fallen Marines. Radio news reporting on Republicans! Playing some speeches slamming Nancy, and then reporting that the Pres CANNOT call Congress back in session because the Senate has not formally recessed? (which Reid did to prevent Pres from recess appointments) Did I hear that right?

You might have heard that right but the statement itself if WRONG.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution says, in part:

he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them

Either of them. The Senate not being officially in recess could actually HELP BOLSTER THE CASE. The Senate is ostensibly in session; all that's needed is the House. GWB wouldn't do this while he is out of the country but certainly could AND SHOULD do it when he returns.

BREAK

Rush mentions the Texas Tea Party. More to follow after his break!

The Constitution says that the President “may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper…”

Seems clear to me. If one body of congress in session means that both are automatically in session, there'd be no reason for the constitution to have specified the "either" option. Nor woul there be reason to have separate adkornment votes by House and Senate.

Speaking of which...the Senate, on Thurs., voted to adjourn. So by what technicality are they saying it's "in session"?

Here’s the applicable part of what the Senate did before its I-Can’t-Believ-It’s-Not-A-Recess stunt to keep things open (from thomas.loc.gov):

Pro Forma Sessions—Agreement: A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that on the following days Senate convene for pro forma sessions with no business conducted, that following each pro forma session Senate recess until the next pro forma session, and that when Senate completes its pro forma session on Friday, September 5, 2008, Senate be adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on Monday, September 8, and resume consideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of S. 3001, National Defense Authorization Act:
Tuesday, August 5 at 10:00 a.m.;
Friday, August 8 at 11:00 a.m.;
Tuesday, August 12 at 2:00 p.m.;
Friday, August 15 at 10:00 a.m.;
Tuesday, August 19 at 9:00 a.m.;
Friday, August 22 at 10:00 a.m.;
Tuesday, August 26 at 2:00 p.m.;
Friday, August 29 at 2:00 p.m.;
Tuesday, September 2 at 12:00 p.m.;
Friday, September 5 at 9:30 a.m.

So this “unanimous” consent for pro-forma sessions are even called what they are—formalities done with no intent to accomplish anything but fulfill the letter of the law. Regardless, I see no reason why this should precluse the ability of the Pres. to call the house back into session.